SOCIAL VALUES AND ORGANIZATION

The great majority of the Philippine population is bound together by
common values and a common religion. Philippine society is characterized
by many positive traits. Among these are strong religious faith, respect
for authority, and high regard for amor proprio (self-esteem)
and smooth interpersonal relationships. Philippine respect for authority
is based on the special honor paid to elder members of the family and,
by extension, to anyone in a position of power. This characteristic is
generally conducive to the smooth running of society, although, when
taken to extreme, it can develop into an authoritarianism that
discourages independent judgment and individual responsibility and
initiative. Filipinos are sensitive to attacks on their own self-esteem
and cultivate a sensitivity to the self-esteem of others as well.
Anything that might hurt another's self-esteem is to be avoided or else
one risks terminating the relationship. One who is insensitive to others
is said to lack a sense of shame and embarrassment, the principal
sanction against improper behavior. This great concern for self- esteem
helps to maintain harmony in society and within one's particular circle,
but it also can give rise to clannishness and a willingness to sacrifice
personal integrity to remain in the good graces of the group. Strong
personal faith enables Filipinos to face great difficulties and
unpredictable risks in the assurance that "God will take care of
things." But, if allowed to deteriorate into fatalism, even this
admirable characteristic can hinder initiative and stand in the way of
progress.

Social organization generally follows a single pattern, although
variations do occur, reflecting the influence of local traditions. Among
lowland Christian Filipinos, social organization continues to be marked
primarily by personal alliance systems, that is, groupings composed of
kin (real and ritual), grantors and recipients of favors, friends, and
partners in commercial exchanges.

Philippine personal alliance systems are anchored by kinship,
beginning with the nuclear family. A Filipino's loyalty goes first to
the immediate family; identity is deeply embedded in the web of kinship.
It is normative that one owes support, loyalty, and trust to one's close
kin and, because kinship is structured bilaterally with affinal as well
as consanguineal relatives, one's kin can include quite a large number
of people. Still, beyond the nuclear family, Filipinos do not assume the
same degree of support, loyalty, and trust that they assume for
immediate family members for whom loyalty is nothing less than a social
imperative. With respect to kin beyond this nuclear family, closeness in
relationship depends very much on physical proximity.

Bonds of ritual kinship, sealed on any of three ceremonial
occasions--baptism, confirmation, and marriage--intensify and extend
personal alliances. This mutual kinship system, known as compadrazgo,
meaning godparenthood or sponsorship, dates back at least to the
introduction of Christianity and perhaps earlier. It is a primary method
of extending the group from which one can expect help in the way of
favors, such as jobs, loans, or just simple gifts on special occasions.
But in asking a friend to become godparent to a child, a Filipino is
also asking that person to become a closer friend. Thus it is common to
ask acquaintances who are of higher economic or social status than
oneself to be sponsors. Such ritual kinship cannot be depended on in
moments of crisis to the same extent as real kinship, but it still
functions for small and regular acts of support such as gift giving.

A dyadic bond--between two individuals--may be formed based on the
concept of utang na loob. Although it is expected that the
debtor will attempt repayment, it is widely recognized that the debt (as
in one's obligation to a parent) can never be fully repaid and the
obligation can last for generations. Saving another's life, providing
employment, or making it possible for another to become educated are
"gifts" that incur utang na loob. Moreover, such
gifts initiate a long-term reciprocal interdependency in which the
grantor of the favor can expect help from the debtor whenever the need
arises and the debtor can, in turn, ask other favors. Such reciprocal
personal alliances have had obvious implications for the society in
general and the political system in particular. In 1990 educated
Filipinos were less likely to feel obligated to extend help (thereby not
initiating an utang na loob relationship) than were rural
dwellers among whom traditional values remained strong. Some observers
believed that as Philippine society became more modernized and urban in
orientation, utang na loob would become less important in the
political and social systems.

In the commercial context, suki relationships (market-
exchange partnerships) may develop between two people who agree to
become regular customer and supplier. In the marketplace, Filipinos will
regularly buy from certain specific suppliers who will give them, in
return, reduced prices, good quality, and, often, credit. Suki
relationships often apply in other contexts as well. For example,
regular patrons of restaurants and small neighborhood retail shops and
tailoring shops often receive special treatment in return for their
patronage. Suki does more than help develop economic exchange
relationships. Because trust is such a vital aspect, it creates a
platform for personal relationships that can blossom into genuine
friendship between individuals.

Patron-client bonds also are very much a part of prescribed patterns
of appropriate behavior. These may be formed between tenant farmers and
their landlords or between any patron who provides resources and
influence in return for the client's personal services and general
support. The reciprocal arrangement typically involves the patron giving
a means of earning a living or of help, protection, and influence and
the client giving labor and personal favors, ranging from household
tasks to political support. These relationships often evolve into ritual
kinship ties, as the tenant or worker may ask the landlord to be a
child's godparent. Similarly, when favors are extended, they tend to
bind patron and client together in a network of mutual obligation or a
long-term interdependency.

Filipinos also extend the circle of social alliances with friendship.
Friendship often is placed on a par with kinship as the most central of
Filipino relationships. Certainly ties among those within one's group of
friends are an important factor in the development of personal alliance
systems. Here, as in other categories, a willingness to help one another
provides the prime rationale for the relationship.

These categories--real kinship, ritual kinship, utang na loob
relationships, suki relationships, patron-client bonds, and
friendship--are not exclusive. They are interrelated components of the
Filipino's personal alliance system. Thus two individuals may be
cousins, become friends, and then cement their friendship through
godparenthood. Each of their social networks will typically include kin
(near and far, affinal and consanguineal), ritual kin, one or two
patron-client relationships, one or more other close friends (and a
larger number of social friends), and a dozen or more market-exchange
partners. Utang na loob may infuse any or all of these
relationships. One's network of social allies may include some eighty or
more people, integrated and interwoven into a personal alliance system.

In 1990 personal alliance systems extended far beyond the local
arena, becoming pyramidal structures going all the way to Manila, where
members of the national political elite represented the tops of numerous
personal alliance pyramids. The Philippine elite was composed of weathly
landlords, financiers, businesspeople, high military officers, and
national political figures. Made up of a few families often descended
from the ilustrados, or enlightened ones, of the Spanish
colonial period, the elite controlled a high percentage of the nations's
wealth. The lavish life-styles of this group usually included owning at
least two homes (one in Manila and one in the province where the family
originated), patronizing expensive shops and restaurants, belonging to
exclusive clubs, and having a retinue of servants. Many counted among
their social acquaintances a number of rich and influential foreigners,
especially Americans, Spaniards, and other Europeans. Their children
attended exclusive private schools in Manila and were often sent abroad,
usually to the United States, for higher education. In addition, by 1990
a new elite of businesspeople, many from Hong Kong and Taiwan, had
developed.

In the cities, there existed a considerable middle-class group
consisting of small entrepreneurs, civil servants, teachers, merchants,
small property owners, and clerks whose employment was relatively
secure. In many middle-class families, both spouses worked. They tended
to place great value on higher education, and most had a college degree.
They also shared a sense of common identity derived from similar
educational experiences, facility in using English, common participation
in service clubs such as the Rotary, and similar economic standing.

Different income groups lived in different neighborhoods in the
cities and lacked the personal contact essential to the patron-client
relationship. Probably the major social division was between those who
had a regular source of income and those who made up the informal sector
of the economy. The latter subsisted by salvaging material from garbage
dumps, begging, occasional paid labor, and peddling. Although their
income was sometimes as high as those in regular jobs, they lacked the
protection of labor legislation and had no claim to any type of social
insurance.